About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
and that's one reason he's going. he wasn't happy with the 2012 elections. do you think conservatism just didn't make the case in the elections last november? >> we always have to do a better job at how we speak about liberty, the constitution and how inclusive it is and how it offers things to people who have not yet experienced the fruits of liberty. so i think we can always do a better job. what i will say about jim demint is he has started and brought some liberty-minded libertarian/conservatives to the senate. we have a pretty good caucus now. there's a real strong jim demint influence in our caucus. >> great stuff. senator rand paul, kentucky, thank you sir. all the best. >> thank you. >>> so besides praising jim demint, senator rand paul said something very interesting. he said he will not vote for a filibuster. he said, let larry reid, no filibust filibuster, 51 vote, simple majority and then he will vote no and let the democrats have the onus of the big tax hike. quite interesting. now here's a political threat. is the republicans at risk of becoming the party of the rich while p
less than he offered before the election and also raises the money taken out of medicare and medicaid by $62 billion. how democrats or anybody could except that -- could accept that. the average folks here in america do not want to pay their fair share. they cannot argue the point that everybody has to give a little bit more to help us eliminate some of this debt and keep the country going in a positive direction. host: did you see the reaction from harry reid? caller: [laughter] host: let me read a portion of that. that is what the democratic leader in the senate had to say about yesterday's counterproposal put out by house republicans. we noted in this letter sent to the white house from the speaker also includes the signatures of paul ryan as well as eric cantor and the rest of his leadership team seems to be on board. here is the chairman of the republican study committee's statement. so here are the opening offers in "the washington post." time." there is the side-by-side in the "the washington times" this morning. a democratic caller, what do you think? caller: by listening at w
to stress the need for elected officials to act. for not only has the passage of time exacerbated some of the economic problems, it has revealed a perhaps equally-dangerous political one. our inability to grapple with pressing fiscal challenges represents nothing less than a crisis in our democratic order. compounding the instability and unpredictability in a volatile world. our propositions for this coalition are simple. the national security of the united states depends on its economic health. that health must be insured by averting the immediate crises and by laying the groundwork for a rigorous, long-term program of debt reduction, smart investment, economic growth and lower income inequality. in national security spending, we can target investments much more efficiently in response to threats that are evolving before our eyes. and resources need to be shifted toward nonmilitary elements of our national security posture. in the immediate term -- and by that i mean over the next four weeks -- we must avoid driving our country over the fiscal cliff. no partisan ideology is worth the
these negotiations. if he really was going to have an about face after the election and really concerned about the legacy, i actually disagree to a certain extent because i think that he thinks the first four years was his legacy. >> yeah. i think you're right to some extent. this is obviously we're speculating here. the president could, this might happen, might be a last minute razzle dazzle here, where he rushes in and they've already kind of agreed to a deal and he didn't get everything he wants, but he gets most of what he wants. he might envision something like that. i'm telling you, when i heard folks like lindsey graham over the weekend say, i don't think there is going to be a deal, that kind of stuck with me and maybe there won't be a deal. i'm not sure that's such a bad thing given what the alternatives are. >> steve: i'm sure you've heard or seen that apparently the republicans doomsday plan, if the talks collapse, allowed the vote on extending the middle tax class tax cuts, the senate passed that back in august, and the republicans would all vote present, then allow the democrats t
a lot of leverage. i was a newly elected governor, i had a lot of political leverage and for various reasons i will not bore you with had the upper hand in the negotiations. i put the pedal to the metal. i won that round. however, the ill will that came from pushing to the other side was so strong that years later legislative leaders remembered how difficult that negotiation was and how unreasonable in their mind i was. we were still talking about payback six and seven years later in future negotiations. i share that -- as you think about not just this moment but the relationship between the congress and the president going forward. it is unclear whether there is enough republicans to support or even consider the rate increase generally, but at the very least i think they would want to see not just that question, but they would want to see what does it come with. i describe it as the two wings of the plane. people are working on one side, but not much discussion on the entitlement and structural spending reduction wing. republicans have put revenues on the table. there are lots of di
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)